Viatrovych is a member of the board of trustees of the National Museum-Memorial of Victims of the Occupation Regimes "Loncky street Prison"" Museum.

[4] In 2010-2011 he was senior visiting scholar at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University, working in particular with the archival documents of Mykola Lebed.

In 2004 he defended his doctoral thesis: “UPA raids beyond Ukrainian borders as part of the creation of an anti-totalitarian national-democratic revolution among the nations of East-Central Europe”.

From August 2005 to December 2007 Viatrovych was a research associate at the I. Kripyakevich Institute for Ukrainian Studies at the National Academy of Sciences in Kyiv.

[12] Viatrovych has been a trustee of the Lontsky Prison National Museum-Memorial to the Victims of Occupation Regimes (Nazi and Soviet) in Lviv, since it was set up and opened to the public in 2009.

[2][13] According to the Jewish Policy Center, in 2017 Viatrovych described the Ukrainian Nazi collaborator Roman Shukhevych as an "eminent personality" and defended the legality of the public display of the symbol of the Galician SS division.

Speaking of the rotation of Euromaidan activists he recalled the activities of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army or UPA: “In the 1940s and 1950s conditions in the underground were worse: people did not leave temporarily to go back to work, but because a comrade had gone forever.

[21] The first Volodymyr Viatrovych's book about the rallies of Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) in Czechoslovakia was written based on his PhD thesis.

[24] It was devoted to a little explored area, and that this work has been appreciated and probably resulted in Viatrovich's appointment a director of TsDVR (Centre for the Study of the Liberation Movement).

[28] The book portrays the Ukrainian nationalists and UPA as a "national liberation" movement and deny any accusations in their collaboration with Nazi Germany and involvement in the Holocaust.

[28][30] Other authors agree that this book is an attempt to deny the crimes of Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) on Jews and to dismiss the allegations of its anti-Semitism.

[31][29] In the opinion of Kurylo and Himka, this work does less to understanding history, but does much to distort it, however it contains an interesting material and forms the basis for further discussions on the relationship of the OUN and UPA to Jews.

[33] In this book, Viatrovych portrays the Volhynia massacres as mutual bloodletting as a result of civil war rather than a coordinated campaign of ethnic cleansing by Ukrainian nationalists against Poles.

[35] Viatrovych tries to prove that there was no order of OUN's leadership for the extermination of the Polish minority, and the Volynia massacre was just a spontaneous rebellion of Ukrainian peasants provoked by the Poles.

[34] Ivan Katchanovski (University of Ottawa) states that the aim of Viatrovych in disseminating his narrative was to "restore Bandera's good name" mostly in the mass media and in non-academic or unscholarly publications.

"[34] Per Anders Rudling states that the monograph lacks any scholarly value, and would recommend The Second Polish-Ukrainian war only as a primary source for studying far-right historical negationism.